If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

01.03.04 - Jerseys - What's the difference between a Replica, Swingman, and Authentic?

01.03.05 - RATS

Item #02: Forum Etiquette

Item #03: NBA/CBA Information

DISCLAIMER: This F.A.Q. is meant for people who are new to or moderately familiar with the NBA/CBA. For a more detailed account, please visit Larry Coon's outstanding website: http://members.cox.net/lmcoon/salarycap.htm

03.01 - Free Agents

03.01.01 - Restricted Free Agents & Bird Rights

03.01.02 - Unrestricted Free Agents

03.01.03 - Lower Level Exception

03.01.04 - Mid Level Exception

03.02 - Player Salaries

03.02.01 - Minimum Salary

03.02.02 - Maximum Salary

03.03 - Team Salaries

03.03.01 - Salary Cap

03.03.02 - Luxury Tax

03.04 - Trades

03.04.01 - Trade Exception

Item #04: Statistics

========================================

Item #01: Current Events, Forum History, References & Terminology

Section #01: Current Events

01.01.01 - count55's guide to salary questions et al - Here are many of the posts count55 has made recently in regards to frequently asked quesitons about the Pacers' salary situation and other issues as they relate to this 2008 summer and into the 2008 pre-season:

Cap holds count against the cap for FA signing purposes, but don't count against the tax or anything else. Therefore, the Pacers "Cap Number" entering next summer's FA period would be $81,033.

Here's Coon's explanation of why:

31. Why do free agents continue to count against a team's cap?

It closes another loophole. Teams otherwise would be able to sign other teams' free agents using their cap room, and then turn their attention to their own free agents using the Bird exceptions. This rule restricts their ability to do that. It doesn't close this loophole completely -- for example, in 2005 Michael Redd's free agent amount was $6 million, even though the Bucks intended to re-sign him for the maximum salary. By waiting to sign Redd last, the Bucks were able to take advantage of the difference by signing Bobby Simmons. Had they signed Redd first, they would have had no cap room to sign Simmons.

However, they can (and we expect that they will) reduce that cap number by renouncing the rights to some of these players. (If they renounce the rights to the players, they could only re-sign them (a) if they had cap room or (b) to a minimum contract. They could "sign-and-trade" the player using the Bird rights, but they could not use the Bird rights any longer to just sign him.)

It seems obvious that they'd almost certainly renounce Rasho, Baston, Graham, and McBob, reducing their cap hold by $18,008. However, that still leaves $21,247 in cap holds related to Jeff Foster, Danny Granger, and Jarrett Jack.

Therefore, assuming that, they'd have a "cap number" of $63,025 with 7 players under contract, and retaining the rights to the three I mentioned. The cap (at 5% growth) would probably be somewhere around $61-62 mm. (These numbers, BTW, completely ignore the holds for our 1st rounder, which would probably be about $2mm, and our MLE, which would be about $6mm).

So, how do they maximize their capspace for next summer, and what would that figure be?

By my calculations, the lowest "Cap Number" the Pacers could have would be about $50,000, leaving them $11 to $12mm below the cap. However, to do that, they'd have to renounce the rights to everyone except Danny.

If they were to renounce everyone except Danny and JJ, they'd be at around $56mm, but then the MLE cap hold would kick in and probably put their "cap number" over the cap.

They could re-sign JJ sooner (extension this summer or new contract early next summer) and probably save $1-2mm, which would likely negate the MLE caphold and leave them at $7-8mm under the cap. Let's say they did that...after signing Danny and a $7mm FA, they'd probably look like this:

Total $63,878 on 11 players, roughly $11mm left under the tax to sign the last four. I guess it's do-able, but who are we going to get for $7-$8mm? If we let everybody go, who's the $11mm prize that's gonna sign with the Pacers? What if somebody offers Danny a higher contract?

It seems like an awful big crap shoot to me.

I have the suspicion that the Pacers are actually just being "cautious". I kinda think they wanna see one more year before they pony up for Danny. The idea of "maximizing cap space" is kind of convoluted, and not as productive as some might believe. Honestly, unless we want to completely gut our team next summer (which we might), we aren't going to have any real cap space.

I guess that's an OK strategy, but I'm not overly comfortable with it.

Sorry...I'm still confused here.....which could be a result of how I am interpreting what is being stated.

I understand that as a RFA next offseason...that we can resign Granger to any contract...even if we are over the Salarycap AT THE TIME of the signing. What I don't understand is IF we give him an extension now....whether his 2009-2010 Salary would count towards the Salarycap once the 2009 FA period starts.

I thought ( like you ) that giving Granger an extension ( much like signing him as a RFA ) would not affect whether our ability to sign a FA or not....but based off of Bruno's statement....it seems to contradict that.

When I read Bruno's statement:

like this:

If we extend Granger now, his 2009-2010 contract immediately counts towards the 2009 Salarycap ( as Bruno puts it...."our cap space would vanish" ) when the FA period starts.....likely pushing us over the Salarycap threshold.....thus defining whether we will be below or above the Salarycap limit at the start of the 2009 FA period and therefore affect whether we can sign a FA or not.

Cable, as of today, Danny counts for $7.0mm against the 2009 FA "Cap Space". This is the amount of his cap hold as a Free Agent.

Regardless of what we do, he counts for about $2.4mm against the 2008-2009 salary cap. This is the amount of his rookie contract for this year.

If we were to sign Danny to an extension this summer, then his 2009 FA "Cap Hit" would be the amount of the first year of his extension, his 2009-2010 salary. Let's say we gave him 5 year extension, starting at $9mm and growing at 10.5% (max raise). He would be on our cap at $9mm for 2009.

The mistake I think Bruno (and others) are making is the belief that Danny will count as $0 against the cap for 2009 until we re-sign him. However, to close the loophole that would allow teams to sign a whole bunch of FA's, then go way over the cap signing their own players, the league CBA puts cap holds for a team's FA's, as explained in my post below. For a guy coming off his rookie contract (4th year), it's 300% of his last year's salary.

The only way Danny would count as $0 against our cap would be if we were to renounce his Bird rights. I don't think anyone...well, anyone with any intelligence...would believe that to be a prudent or desirable course of action.

A note on Shamsports: The amount in Red in the 2009 column for Danny and JJ is the "qualifying offer". This IS NOT a cap hold. It is the one-year amount that would have to be offered to those players in order for the Pacers to retain right to match. If the Pacers did not offer at least that, they'd effectively renounce their rights making the players UNrestricted Free Agents.

Thanks for the clarification. That's what I have been trying to figure out.

IF we extend him now and he ( for example ) will count as $9 mil in 2009-2010...does that mean that at the start of the 2009 FA period...our Salarycap will be set at $50 mil instead of $41 mil ( assuming that we renounce Granger and let him become a RFA )?

If that is the case.....that makes a huge difference. I know that in the end....regardless of whether we extend Granger or resign him as a RFA....that there will be so much $$$ that TPTB are going to want to spend....it's just a matter of how we spend the $$$ and how we acquire the players that we have.

Yes, if we extend him now, we'll be at $50mm. However, even if we don't, but we retain his rights, we'll still be at $48mm with his cap hold.

I know that for RFAs like Granger and Jack that we have the right to match any offer they get.....but what about our UFAs like Foster, Rasho, Baston and McRoberts?

I know that in the end...that it's entirely up to the UFA to choose where he goes....but I wasn't sure if the CBA gives the team that currently owns his contract any advantages to resign that player over other teams.

The advantage that we have on those guys on other teams is that we can offer a 6-year contract, while other teams can offer only a 5-year deal, max.

The key advantage over most teams, though, is the Bird rights...the ability to go over the cap to sign them. We lose that advantage, however, if we renounce their rights.

1. This team has no history of pursuing or bagging major free agents. I don't see a real reason to think this will change given (a) the teams level of talent, (b) the teams contract commitments to players like Murphy, Dunleavy, & Tinsley (& the impending Danny contract) (c) the team's current attendance and financial position, and (d) the questions surrounding the future of the ownership given the advanced age of the Simons, and the reported lack of interest by David Simon.

2. It's exceedingly unlikely that we will actually have "significant cap space". This has been outlined ad nauseum, but the CBA puts cap holds for free agents on salaries in order to prevent teams from circumventing the cap by signing FA, then re-signing their own players.

It closes another loophole. Teams otherwise would be able to sign other teams' free agents using their cap room, and then turn their attention to their own free agents using the Bird exceptions. This rule restricts their ability to do that. It doesn't close this loophole completely -- for example, in 2005 Michael Redd's free agent amount was $6 million, even though the Bucks intended to re-sign him for the maximum salary. By waiting to sign Redd last, the Bucks were able to take advantage of the difference by signing Bobby Simmons. Had they signed Redd first, they would have had no cap room to sign Simmons.

If we don't sign Danny, he will still count as $7mm towards our cap next summer until he signs a contract with us or someone else. We have just under $42mm in contract commitments next year. Danny's cap hold would put us at $49mm, and the hold for our 1st round pick will probably put us at around $50-51mm. Assuming that the cap will be around $62mm next year, that would leave us $12mm of cap space before considering any other free agent cap holds we have. We have the following other cap holds:

So, before we actually have cap space available to sign free agents, we'd have to renounce the rights to some or all of the players listed above. To get the $11-12mm, we'd have to renounce the rights to all of them. What does it mean to "renounce" a player? It means that we're basically giving up our right to go over the salary cap to sign them. We can re-sign them, but only if (a) we have enough free cap space (in other words, they become the UFA we'd sign) or (b) they sign to the Minimum Player exception. We can't use the MLE. We can't use Bird Rights. We can sign-and-trade them, but that gets pretty speculative. Effectively, you have lost those players, likely with no compensation.

So, let's say we do renounce all of those players. Why would a player like Carlos Boozer take a below-market offer (starting at $11-12mm) to come to a team with Granger, Dunleavy, Murphy, B Rush, Hibbert, Diener, Ford, Tinsley (or his replacement/buyout amount), and a (likely) mid-1st rounder, and nothing else? What difference maker are you going to get for that amount that is that big of an upgrade over the rights to Foster, Jack, or potentially Rasho?

If we were to decide that we wanted to retain the rights to even one of the rotational players listed above (Rasho, Foster, or Jack), then their cap hold would probably get us close enough to the cap for the MLE & LLE cap holds (yes, they have those, too) to kick in, effectively zeroing out our free cap space and relegating us to MLE-level signings.

The idea of waiting until next year to sign Danny to "maximize cap space" is simply a red herring. It is flawed in it's very core.

There is only one reason that the Pacers would not sign Danny to an extension this year:

The Pacers Front Office and ownership is, at this time, unwilling to commit to Danny at the price he would be asking for this summer.

They want to see another year. They're gunshy from Rose, JO, Bender, Artest, Jackson, and Tinsley. They're hemmorhaging money, and attendance is abysmal. The Simons are aging, and they're balking at committing $60+mm to a guy who only has one year of big numbers, and that was on a team that didn't make the playoffs.

Or worse. They may not be willing to commit that money to anybody.

The talk of "free agents" is a misdirection. The Pacers are not in a position to sign major free agents, and they won't be next summer, either. While their "conservatism" may be sound fiscal policy, it's something we should be concerned about. What happens if Danny averages 20 & 7, but the team wins 30 games? Did he prove that he was worth Iggy money, or did he prove that he wasn't worth it?

They may be playing the exact same game that Atlanta did with Josh Smith...hoping that the market will be constrained enough to knock down Danny's price.

If the Pacers knew for sure that they wanted to lock up Danny, then it would be done this summer, just like NO did with Paul, Milwaukee did with Bogut, and GS did with Ellis & Biedrins. Allowing Danny to enter the FA market is much more indicative of a higher willingness to let him walk than we currently would like to believe, than it is of strategic cap planning.

If Danny doesn't sign an extension this summer, I would (unscientifically) put the chances of us losing him next summer at 1 in 3. This isn't because I think that it's more likely for a huge bidding war to drive him out of our price range. It's because I think that the ownership may think he's already out of our price range.

Indy has been trying to free up cap space to hit next year's free agency market. Im sure they'll be interested in Boozer if they can scrap up enough money after signing Granger. Pacers have a lot of expirers at the end of his season: Daniels ($6,864,200), Bason ($2,272,860), Diener ($1,620,000), Foster ($5,500,000 - who will probably be re-signed), Graham ($826,269), and Nesterovic ($8,400,000) and McRoberts ($711,517)...Jack, Granger and Williams (if he behaves and matures) will most likely be resigned.

Basically $26,194,846 will come off the books next year, but Granger and Jack will be the main player that need to be signed. Right now the Pacers are $10 mill over the cap. So they'll have about $16 mill to re-sign players or add to their roster. The cap right now is at about $59 million, ive heard rumors that next season it will be at $65 (I dont know where I read this, but I remember it). If Granger is signed at about $11 million a season and Jack at $4 million a season thats $15 mill gone right away about about $1 million to work with, with the current salary cap. If the cap moves about $6 Million up, then the Pacers will have $7 million to work with. If the Pacers can sign Boozer for $12 million a season that means they'll only be over the cap by $5 million with this roster:

Ford/Jack
Dunleavy/Rush
Granger/Williams
Boozer/Foster
Murphy/Hibbert

Not a bad start 5. Sorry for that long analysis, just trying to put in perspective what the Pacers are trying to do

If we retained the rights to Granger, Jack, and Foster, then the cap holds would prevent us for being able to sign Boozer.

I didn't read all of what count wrote due to its Naptimeyness, but I imagine he said that the OP is incorrect since we would have what is called a "cap hold" next summer anyway that would be tie up at least somewhat close to as much cap room as what we would end up giving Danny in Year 1 of an extension.

The only benefit we could get out of not signing Danny this summer is if he turns out to be a worse player than we thought over the next 10 months. And that, of course, isn't particularly helpful for our franchise either.

Basically, we don't have any real cap space available next year, and Danny's extension would make only a minimal impact on it.

Not signing Danny is far more likely to be due to misgivings the Pacers have about paying Danny (specifically, or quite possibly anyone, generally) the kind of money he would likely command this (or next) summer.

Therefore, rather than viewing it as some clever strategem to help turn the team around, we should more likely view this turn of events as a troubling sign that the Simons' commitment to the Pacers may be faltering, and that they are more concerned with the P&L than the Box Score.

How much cap space would we have if we only hold onto the rights to Danny and Jack?

Also, something else to keep in mind is that there is always the possibility of a new trade that would change our finances. If we end up with more expiring contracts, you never know.

Contracts: $41,778

Capholds: $14,997 (Danny $6,989, JJ $6,008, 1st Rounder $2,000)

Total $56,775

Assuming a $62,000 salary cap (5.7% growth over this year's), we'd have $5,225, which would likely get gobbled up by the roughly $6,000 MLE hold.

Obviously, if we could find a way to convert somebody (preferrably Tinsley) into an expiring contract this year, it would significantly change the math, but, failing that, the only way we'll be able to have enough space to sign someone for more than the MLE is to renounce everybody but Danny.

If we wanted to keep Jack, we'd probably be better off signing him to an extension this summer, or locking him up on Day 1 next, because it's exceedingly unlikely he'd command a contract starting at $6,000. In fact, with the exception of Danny, all of those players listed would likely sign 1st year contracts for far less than their cap holds. However, once they were signed and added to our existing contracts and Danny's cap hold, we'd be back up against the cap and looking at MLE's anyway, so there's not a huge advantage in being quick with them.

even when if we decide to sign Boozer along with everyone you mentioned, we'll be in the same position, where we are about $10 - $12 million over the cap but with a much better team

The Pacers can't sign Boozer and retain the rights to Granger, Jack, and Foster.

What you're saying the Pacers are doing cannot be done under the salary cap rules.

We can't go over the cap to sign Boozer, and we won't have enough space to sign Boozer unless we renounce the rights to two of the three guys mentioned above. If we renounce their rights, then we couldn't go over the cap to sign them, unless they signed for the Minimum contract, which they won't.

That makes sense, but then again, if we can get Jack for a value under his cap hold and somehow pull of a favorable Tinsley trade then we might be more than MLE players next summer. Right? Or is my math just off right now?

Here's the basic deal. If the Pacers don't move Tinsley, or don't reduce the salary impact on next year in a Tinsley deal, the Pacers will have roughly $47.9mm in guaranteed contracts. Danny's cap hold will be about $7.0mm, and let's assume a caphold for our first round pick of about $2.0mm.

47.9 plus 7.0 plus 2.0 puts us at about 56.9mm. I'd expect the cap to be between 61 & 62mm next year, so that leaves us only $5-6mm of space.

Caveat: If we can make the Denver Deal (Atkins/Hunter for Tinsley), then that would clear an additional $2.7mm of cap space, which could make us a player above the MLE.

However, if we do anything with Jack other than renouncing his rights, then we're basically out of cap space.

Unless we unload one of the big contracts for an expiring (Murph, Junior, Tinsley), we will not be big players in Free Agency next year. Any major acquisitions will come through the Draft, trades, or the MLE.

EDIT: I should note that all of the figures above are prior to looking at JJ's cap hold or re-signing him. The same is true with Rasho, McBob, Graham, and Baston

Count - assuming we wait to extend Danny and Jack until later next summer, and we do not make anymore moves, how much money will we have next summer to hit FA with before we hit the cap??? Let's also assume we do not get an expiring for tinsley, have a 1st rounder at a starting salary of say 1.5 million, and the cap increases by the same % next summer as it did this summer.

I'm taking the approach that we use our room under the cap to sign a FA and then go over the cap to resign Danny & Jack. I know they have cap hold numbers though.

Jeff was will probably be about $6.1 next year, per reports, so we'll be around $48 in guaranteed contracts (assuming Tinsley's contract or it's equivalent). In order to retain Danny & JJ's rights, there will be capholds of $7mm and $6mm, respectively. Therefore, if we intend to keep both (as you suggest), we'll still effectively be at $61mm..at or around the cap.

We basically would be able to sign someone using the MLE, or about $6mm starting salary.

Jeff was will probably be about $6.1 next year, per reports, so we'll be around $48 in guaranteed contracts (assuming Tinsley's contract or it's equivalent). In order to retain Danny & JJ's rights, there will be capholds of $7mm and $6mm, respectively. Therefore, if we intend to keep both (as you suggest), we'll still effectively be at $61mm..at or around the cap.

We basically would be able to sign someone using the MLE, or about $6mm starting salary.

Can we have count do a sticky cap thread and update it as the roster changes?

That way we can direct this there.

Let me see what I can do...(I'll put the thread together, but it's somebody else's call on the sticky.)

Section #02: Abbreviations & Acronyms

01.02.01 - TPTB - The Powers That Be - Whomever at that time is in the front office of the Pacers, Colts, or whatever team is being discussed.

Section #03: References

01.03.01 - Burlington Coat Factory - Several forum parties from 2003-2007 took place at Briggsy's Pizza King in Castleton. Briggy's was a small building located on the outskirts of the parking lot of the nearby Burlington Coat Factory.

The summer forum party of 2004 took place on the day in which it was announced that Al Harrington had been traded to the Atlanta Hawks for Stephen Jackson.

One of the party members, a poster by the name of Tim, was well known as a very strong supporter of Harrington at that time. Ironically, prior to the trade announcement, he had already passionately explained his position on Harrington to the other party members earlier that evening. Tim appeared to be dejected after the news broke.

As the party was winding down, the remaining party members were standing outside in the parking lot to conclude the evening. When Tim finally decided to leave, he took off in his vehicle heading directly at the Burlington Coat Factory. From the point of view of the remaining party members, Tim appeared to be failing to apply the brakes on his vehicle as he drew closer and closer to the BCF.

In jest, the observers started to imply he was trying to commit suicide in his despair by yelling exclamations to Tim such as, "No!" "Don't do it!" and "Stop!" before he finally slowed down and turned parallel to the front of the BCF.

Since that time, members of Pacers Digest who understand the reference will occasionally threaten to drive into the Burlington Coat Factory if something they view as particularly unfavorable with the Pacers were to happen.

01.03.02 - Going PFFL - Briefly, PFFL = Pacer Fan For Life.

He was an avid pacer fan and a poster at the Star Forum; probably from the very beginning. His posts were memorable not so much for basketball insights but for their humor and a seemingly endless collection of hilariously funny, personal anecdotes.

One thing he was very passionate about was that Isiah Thomas was a terrible coach. There were many debates about this fact, and after the last playoff disaster at the end of the 2002-03 season PFFL was absolutely convinced that an Isiah firing was inevitable. He felt so strongly about it that he vowed to give up on his life-long love of the team if Isiah was not fired.

Well, Donnie Walsh gave Isiah the old public "vote of confidence".

PFFL was furious- that night on the forum he, "went PFFL."

Now, he was known for his humor, stories, cleverness, and not for any huge temper, but he came onto the forum and berated the Pacers organization with every 4-letter word you can think of; basically begging to get banned. He was. Then he went on his wife's account and did the same thing; getting the IP banned. The posts all got deleted fairly quickly.

Of course, a few months later Larry Bird came on board, and Isiah was immediately fired. PFFL briefly appeared on Pacers Digest back in August/September 2003, but quickly disappeared again and has not been seen since. "Going PFFL" is a total all-out burst of rage that apparently ends your fandom forever.

Of course, over the years, many here felt attached to him for all of his funny moments and stories (guys like Peck and Skaut_Ech can more attest to this), but he dropped off the Earth to never return. Now and then, someone here thinks a new Star poster might be him, but it never seems to fit. When you go PFFL, apparently the rage is permanent, even if the cause of the rage disappears.

There will be an official guess thread posted for each game. Make a post in that thread with your guess. Right before the game, the thread will be 'closed' and the guesses listed. After the game, the guesses will be scored and a winner posted.

What format do I use for my guess?

The first two numbers in your post are taken as your score. The text block immediately preceding the numbers is used to determine which team the number goes with. If the text block contains "Ind" or "Pacers", then the number after it is assumed to be the Pacers' score. Failing that, the parser tends to take the second number as the Pacers score but might not do that every time. Better to be on safe side. Also, formatting such as colors and bold and quotes and smilies and such can throw off RoboDoug. Use at your own risk.

That sounds confusing. Can I have some examples?

Sure. Here are some good ones:

Pacers 88
Knicks 87

Pacers-88,Knicks-87

Indy 103-83

Pacers 103
Bad guys 102

Knicks 87, Pacers 83

And here are some bad ones:

88-87 Pacers

Good guys 88
bad guys 87

Last time they played it was 88-87, it will be a higher-scoring game this time, so I'll go Pacers 93, Knicks 88.

Knicks win 90-82.

Pacers lose 90-82

90 Pacers
82 Knicks

How do I win?

The winner is the poster with the lowest 'OffBy'.

What's an 'OffBy' and how is it calculated?

'OffBy' is the total number of points your guess was 'off by'. It is calculated by comparing your guess for each team with their actual score. The difference between your picks for each team and their real score is added together. That is your "off by". Lowest wins. You pick Pacers 90 Knicks 80. The real score is Knicks 95 Pacers 81. You are off by 24. (90-81) + (95-80). Total score does not mater. Getting the winner correct does not matter.

Nothing. One year Will Galen decided to run a little contest where posted would guess the correct winner of the game. Some people enjoyed it, so I decided to would record the winner and maybe automate that. I never did.

Who is RoboDoug?

RoboDoug is a computer program. Really.

Why didn't RoboDoug record my guess?

There's only a limited number of guess formats that RoboDoug can understand. He's a computer program, remember. I tried to make him flexible enough to understand most common formats, but the number of possible formats is quite large. Sorry. If you want to get 'cute' with your guess and RoboDoug doesn't understand it, that's life.

Can I send RoboDoug my guess via email or PM?

No. He doesn't get email and he doesn't read PMs. He hates you.

What's RoboDoug written in?

Java. With a MySQL database behind it.

Who wrote RoboDoug?

Doug. Duh. I still run and maintain him.

How does RoboDoug come up with his guesses?

I don't know.

What do you mean you don't know?

I programmed his guessing algorithms using Genetic Programming, then 'evolved' the guessing logic. I know what data he uses, but not how.

Genetic Algorithms? Why not a neural network?

I tried them. It wasn't accurate enough. I couldn't seem to find a network architecture that worked well.

How long has this contest been running?

Since at least the 2001-2002 season.

Who appointed you "Guess the Score" Czar?

Nobody, really. Somebody, I don't remember who, did the contest on RATS in 2001. The next year, nobody stepped up to run it, so I took over posting and scoring the contest.

Why did you write a computer program to do it?

Because doing it by hand is a royal pain in the butt. The first year I used a spreadsheet and did it 'by hand'. It was very time consuming. I had some new technologies I wanted to learn, so I figured this would be a good exercise to learn them.

Why don't you take RoboDoug to Vegas?

He was evolved toward minimizing 'off-by', not beating point spreads. That's a different problem.

So re-write him to use point spreads!

I have to admit of I've thought about that a couple of times. My ego says I'm good enough to do that - at the very least it is both an interesting and difficult problem. My favorite type. But, it IS a very difficult problem and would really be time consuming. And my gut feeling is that the margins would be too thin to make the risk/reward worth it.

Why don't you add 'this cool feature' to RoboDoug?

If it's a good idea, I might. I've got a list of things I want to do, though, so it might be a while.

Thin, dazzle mesh. Official team graphics and numbers iron-screened on. Cheap, low quaility. Great for small kids. I have also found that these replica jerseys, (ver since Reebok took over NBA merchandising now Adidas, they bought Reebok) all have a "vest" shouldering to them, instead of a tank top look.

Swingman:

Thicker mesh, tackle-twil (sewn) lettering and numbering. Numbers and letters are a single layer of the colors. Good price for more realistic look. $75-$85 depending on type and player (I always buy these. They are great looking and inexpensive)

Authentic:

Same material used in on-court uniforms. Multi-layer tackle-twill lettering and numbers. Everthing is sewn on individually. $160

All prices are adult sizing.

All returning players have a jersey in each color, replica, swingman, and authentic. Except for Diener, which only comes in Yellow replica, yellow and navy swingman, and yellow authentic.

Swingman jerseys come as each player, at least in Navy. All new players as of this year have a replica jersey and a navy swingman jersey. That is it.

Each jersey has the NBA logo sewn into the left chest and the Adidas logo sewn into the right. A "jocktag" appears sewn into the bottom-left of each jersey.

01.03.05 - RATS - Refers to the Indianapolis Star Message Board or Forum. Rats is from spelling Star backwards. It is considered to be a demeaning reference to that message board.

I intend for this to be largely if not completely member-driven. If I feel I have something to contribute I will, but primarily you guys will build this F.A.Q. from the ground up.

We will divide it into various topics, and I will do my best to keep it organized and easy to read.

This would be the place to answer those persistent questions about the CBA, including the hot question of, "Can we or can we not combine our trade exception with Player X in a trade?"

It can also be questions about the forum itself. I am not going to make this into a joke, so please don't come in just to be silly. But sometimes newer folks have questions about our forum etiquette, references, abbreviations, or history, and I think that has a place here, too.

What I'm asking you to do is make a reply in this thread that is factually accurate, easy to read and understand, and with zero or a minimum of grammatic mistakes (I'm not going to be super strict on this, but it needs to not look sloppy) to explain a topic that frequently or consistently appears on Pacers Digest.

For example, count55 may want to just copy and paste (or touch up if he thinks it needs it) his explanations of CBA rules regarding trade exceptions and retaining the rights of free agents.

Someone else might want to explain what things like IMHO or TPTB mean.

Re: The Official Pacers Digest F.A.Q. Thread

Might want to add that any topic is open for discussion except race. Bringing up any subject pertaining to how the league might be affected by it's racial make-up means the thread will be immediately closed.

Re: The Official Pacers Digest F.A.Q. Thread

Might want to add that any topic is open for discussion except race. Bringing up any subject pertaining to how the league might be affected by it's racial make-up means the thread will be immediately closed.

I'm not sure if you're trying to make a point or not, but racial discussions quickly enter the realm of other heated discussions that aren't allowed on PD that usually tie in with politics.

Re: The Official Pacers Digest F.A.Q. Thread

I think he's referring to Graham Marnatsi and in that case - not a redickulous thought.

Just when I finally get to hating you proper, you pull me right back in. Damn you and Redd. I applaud you for maintaining "not a redickulous thought" which I'd like to see become as solid here as "going PFFL" or "that's how I live my life now".

Putty, I kinda felt too uncomfortable to mention BCF, and I wasn't even there. I hate to laugh at the misfortunes of others. Well, mostly.

Re: The Official Pacers Digest F.A.Q. Thread

CAP EXCEPTIONS
Trade Exceptions, MLE/Mid-Level Exception, etc

These are allowed EXCEPTIONS to the rule that you cannot add any more salary to the roster once you go over the cap limit. They are NOT tradeable assets. Each works as a SPACE in your cap that can take on some amount of salary.

TE (trade exception) - when you make a trade you have the right, by exception rules, to acquire in return up to 125%+100K of the salary you sent out in total (no matter how many teams were involved). This is itself a TRADE EXCEPTION since your salary level is going to increase despite being over the cap.

However, you have the option to forfeit this 25% extra in exchange for completing the trade up to a year later. This is what is commonly called a "trade exception" even though either version is a true TE.

In essence you retain the right to maintain the exact same level of salary for up to one year from the trade. This means that if you take back less than you sent out, passing on the 25% extra option, you can still bring back in the difference as an EXISTING CONTRACT (plural too, if you fill the hole with smaller contracts).

This is still a portion of the previous trade and can NOT BE COMBINED with any new trades. So you can't add the PLAYER X salary to a TE amount to get a larger total salary hole in the cap.

Typical use of a trade exception is to do dual trades in which one portion involves sending "nothing" (rights to a non-contracted player is normal) for a contract of equal or lesser value to your TE, and then also trading whatever other players need to be involved to get both sides to agree to do the TE trade.

Since a TE is the completion of a trade it can NOT be used to sign players. You can acquire previously existing contracts but can not create new ones (signing a free agent). Another example of an existing contract that doesn't involve a trade would be to "sign" a player on waivers as this is simply the team agreeing to take on that existing contract. Orien Greene was an example of this type of move.

MLE/Mid Levels and Minimum Level exceptions can NOT be used in trades. These are exceptions/holes that can only be used to create NEW CONTRACTS. These exist to allow some player movement which benefits the players' association as well as ensuring that all teams can field a full roster regardless of their cap situation.

Resigning your own players, Bird's rights, etc are yet another example of an EXCEPTION to the rule that you can't be over the cap.

Finally, the salary cap figure for each team in the off season includes HOLDS ON THE CAP for all of these possible options, as long as the team retains the rights to use them.

A team might not have salary that hits the cap level, but all TEs, MLEs, and rights to resign your own players require holds against the cap of appropriate amounts. These holds are added to the actual salary and often keep a team well over the cap limit.

A team must renounce the rights to use any/all of those in order to have them removed from their cap figure. But in doing so the team gives up the rights to use them later. This is especially problematic with Bird's rights as it gives the home team an advantage over other potential suitors when the player becomes a free agent; see Danny Granger for a current example.

We have come to think of the cap as soft and/or meaningless because of the active use of all these exceptions, but in fact it's a hard cap paired with exceptions that were created to resolve problems or maintain some financial options for players.

Many of the creative ideas online fans come up with go directly against the spirit of these exceptions and those abuses have already been thought of or previously abused and now have rules in place to prevent them being used that way. So when you wonder "why can't they..." it's probably because of that reason - abuses by teams.

Re: The Official Pacers Digest F.A.Q. Thread

Since a TE is the completion of a trade it can NOT be used to sign players. You can acquire previously existing contracts but can not create new ones (signing a free agent). Another example of an existing contract that doesn't involve a trade would be to "sign" a player on waivers as this is simply the team agreeing to take on that existing contract. Orien Greene was an example of this type of move.

Actually, I don't think a TE was used for Orien Greene. He was acquired under the "Minimum Player Exception". Teams can offer minimum salary contracts regardless of their cap position.

Also, the "Minimum Player Exception" (MPE) can play an odd role in trades, and the creation of TE's.

First, any team over the cap can acquire a player on an MPE without having to meet the 125% rule. For example, the Pacers could trade Josh McRoberts to the Celtics (also over the cap) for a 2nd Round Draft Pick.

Second, when MPE players are dealt, they count for the team sending them out, but essentially are ignored by the team recieving them when calculating the credit for the TE. In the case of the Portland trade this summer, it worked like this:

The Draft Picks (actually, by the time of the trade, they were the player rights to Rush & Bayless) had $0 salary cap value. Ike was scheduled to make $2.9mm, so Portland had to send out at least $2.4mm to meet the 125% rule. Jack will make $2.0, and Portland threw in McBob, scheduled to make the league min of $0.7mm. For Portland, it counted at $2.7mm. However, for the Pacers in regards to creation of the TE, McBob was ignored. Therefore, the Pacers sent out $2.9mm and only got back $2.0mm, which is why there is a $0.9mm TE created from that trade.

Re: The Official Pacers Digest F.A.Q. Thread

Actually, I don't think a TE was used for Orien Greene. He was acquired under the "Minimum Player Exception". Teams can offer minimum salary contracts regardless of their cap position.

No, Greene was taken while still on waivers (from the Celtics) and therefore still with an active contract. I think it was the James Jones TE space they used to get him. He did not clear waivers and maintained his original contract when the Pacers claimed him. Greene was not making the MIN either.

The first year of his contract will be fully guaranteed according to the source, while the 2nd year is partially guaranteed and the 3rd year is a team option. The Celtics had to dip into their Mid-Level Exception to lock him up for the three year deal, as Greene will earn more than the NBA minimum.

Good stuff on the way the MPE works on the creation of TEs though, I didn't realize or think of that.

WAIVERS
For the less savvy CBA people (thus the FAQ) when a player is waived there is a time frame in which his contract still exists (48 hours in season, 1 week in the off season). If a team claims him during this period his contract comes off the original team's books and goes to the new team, basically like a trade for nothing in return (but salary relief).

However, if he goes through the waiver period without being claimed then the original team is still financially on the hook and the contract is "dead" otherwise. Now a team can sign a new contract with that player for whatever amount they'd like, he's a free agent at this point. The original team gets the chance for SLIGHT financial relief but typically it's not much.

So if you waive Tinsley no one will claim him because they'll get him much cheaper after he clears. Therefore it doesn't help the Pacers financially/cap. OTOH if you had him on a great contract that everyone considered a decent deal then he'd never get through waivers and you'd be off the hook....for a guy everyone thinks is a decent bargain (so why'd you waive him?).

The waivers are not a good way to dump contracts. Greene had to do with potential, problems in Boston and a moderately low deal worth taking a risk on to those not convinced that he wouldn't make it in the NBA.

Also to claim someone off waivers you need a CONTRACT HOLE, thus the TE for Greene. Being under the cap, having a disability exception or the player making the min also work as ways of claiming the player.

Finally there are rules preventing teams from resigning a waived player that they traded away. There is a 20-30 day window after the new team waives him before you can resign him. This helps prevent "one way" trading in which you essentially give up nothing to get a new player.

MPE (Minimum Exceptions)
As Count and I have alluded to already, these are an UNLIMITED resource and regardless of your cap status you can claim or deal for as many MPE deals as you want. The purpose of this exception is to ensure that teams can maintain a roster count. An MPE can be used on a waiver guy (making the MIN), trading a pick for a guy making the MIN, signing FAs for the MIN, etc.

Re: The Official Pacers Digest F.A.Q. Thread

No, Greene was taken while still on waivers (from the Celtics) and therefore still with an active contract. I think it was the James Jones TE space they used to get him. He did not clear waivers and maintained his original contract when the Pacers claimed him. Greene was not making the MIN either.

Odd thing about Orien's contract: He was paid exactly the league minimum. However, the MPE is only available for contracts up to two years in length. The Celtics offered a three year deal (at the league min salary) to Orien, therefore, they had to use part of their MLE.

What I'm not sure of his how the league would've viewed Orien's contract at the time the Pacers claimed him off of waivers. With the exception of the actual establishment of the MPE, Coon's FAQ only talks about players "making the league minimum." Orien's contract, at the time we claimed him, only had two years left. In that situation, I wonder if we (or any other team) could've exercised the MPE to acquire him, or if we ended up actually needing the TE.